|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** This is an archived, static copy of the Casebook messages boards dating from 1998 to 2003. These threads cannot be replied to here. If you want to participate in our current forums please go to https://forum.casebook.org **
Torso Murders of 1888-1889, The
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Suspects: Specific Suspects:
Later Suspects [ 1910 - Present ]:
Torso Murders of 1888-1889, The
Author: Pat Malott
Saturday, 14 November 1998 - 04:11 pm |        | Three (3) cut up torsos were found in London:
1) Pinchin St. (Lydia Hart?) about Sept. 3, 1889
2) White Hall Mystery at New Scotland Yard Oct. 3, 1888
3) Elizabeth Jackson June 4-10, 1889
(1) Cut up Torso was found in Paris, Nov. 1886, In front of Montrouge Church.
-"Murder attributed by the Ochrana Gazette to Vassily Konovalov"-
Also woman victim in petrograd - 1891
Source: Paul Begg, The Jack the Ripper A-Z
Probably not the Ripper, but all appear to be the work of a Ripper suspect.
Were there two different serial killers in London? |
Author: A. Dylan Gable
Saturday, 14 November 1998 - 04:12 pm | | The London Torso killings resumed in the early 1930s. The last recorded one was at Brighton in June of 1935.
In MacNaghtens Memo, he refers to the 'Rainham Mystery' of 1887 as possibly connected with the Torso killings. Any ideas on where info on this would be? I can't find any. I wonder if the 'Rainham' of which MacNaghten speaks was 'Raynham', as in Raynham Hall...
Re: The second wave of torso killings. The London ones stopped in June, 1935... The Cleveland Torso Killer started up in September of that same year. Interesting. |
Author: Julian
Thursday, 14 January 1999 - 09:47 pm | | G'day Pat and A.Dylan Gable,
I'm relatively new to this but I seem to be following your train of thought in some direction. I'm following an idea at the moment that Jack was working in tandem with someone in some sort of warped game of who could be the most violently destructive.
I think you're on the right track when you say there was someone else dismembering women around Whitechapel at the same time as jack. It just wasn't Jacks style, but weirder things have been known to happen.
Jules |
Author: robert
Friday, 03 December 1999 - 11:30 am | | | I think Jack the Ripper was my Dad |
Author: ChrisGeorge
Friday, 03 December 1999 - 12:41 pm | | Hello Robert:
Are you a hundred years old, Robert? Because that is about the age you would have to be if Jack was your dad.
Chris George |
Author: Bryan Stebelton
Thursday, 15 March 2001 - 09:58 am | | | Hello all,new to the boards, topic caught my eye, primarily due to the fact that I live real close to Cleveland.I have no great knowledge of the Mad butcher of Kingsbury run (the other more sensational name for the torso killer)other than having read a book many years ago,and I cannot even recall the title(possibly just Torso)I do however believe the author is/was a famous lawyer.Sorry I'm rambling,as to the whitechapel torsos I'm inclined to believe that Jack was not responsible,much too big a change in signature,which is not unheard of,but imo,unlikely.I do believe that there was more than one killer in the area at the same time,possibly three!Jack for one,im willing to credit him with all five canonical victims,and possibly one more.The torso killer,and the stabber who may not have been a serial killer in the classic sense,more likely a petit criminal out for small(had to of been)monetary gains.The multiple serial killer idea is not unheard of,one need look no further than southern California Throughout the 1970's.I apologize for the length of my post,I guess I had alot to say on the subject. |
Author: Brenda L. Conklin
Sunday, 01 December 2002 - 01:27 pm | | I am reviving this long dead thread just to make the comment that if JTR is responsible for any of the torso killings (the ones during and after 1888), I feel that the MO is different due to the threat of the bloodhounds. That would explain dumping the bodies in the river, to throw off any scent. Its my personal opinion that Jack was responsible for the White Hall mystery. (I have no proof, of course! The word "proof" doesn't seem to apply with anything JTR related.) I believe he was responsible and he did it as a jab to the police, but somehow this murder just didn't get the public reaction he was expecting. Maybe the missing head somehow depersonalized the horror? This could possibly explain the overkill of Mary Jane later on, if public reaction was important to Jack.
All of the 1889 murders very much puzzle me. From Alice McKenzie to Pinchin St., I don't know what to make of any of them. They are like Jack, but very unlike him too. Are they copycats or is it just Jack who's unable to muster the rage he suffered in 1888?
I seem to remember reading on these boards that someone is attempting a book on the torso killings? Is this true? Who's doing it and how is the research coming along? I have a feeling that a clue to who Jack was lies in solving one of these murders. |
Author: Jack Traisson
Sunday, 01 December 2002 - 04:34 pm | | Hi Brenda,
R. Michael Gordon, author of 'Alias Jack the Ripper' has already published a book on the torso murders that happened between 1887-1902. I haven't had time to read 'The Thames Torso Murders of Victorian London' yet so I can not say how good the research is. Also I understand that Richard Whittington-Egan has a book about the torso murders on the way.
Also, concerning the Whitehall Torso case, the body was found in the basement of New Scotland Yard, which was still under construction at the time. Only the arms were found in the Thames. The bloodhound tests were not carried out until a week after the Whitehall torso was discovered. The killer had no reason to fear this. He stood a much greater chance being caught placing the torso.
Part of the reason it didn't get the "public reaction" you spoke of is that the body was dumped two days after the sensational double-event. Dr. Bond estimated that the body was six weeks to two months old. This means that the Whitehall victim was murdered before Nichols, and possibly before Tabram. If it was Jack, why wait so long to get rid of it? He could have turned the double-event in to a triple-event by disposing of the body in the East End on September 30th. Another problem I have is that Westminster is a world away from Whitechapel. This is why the police in 1889 spent more time on the Pinchin Street torso case as a possible JtR murder because it fits geographically. Once again, though, it is easier to link it with Whitehall than JtR.
Personally, I feel we have two seperate series', and a few one off killings.
One of the difficulties in establishing a canon for JtR is the weapon used. Most murders in 19th century England were done with a knife. Many murders done with a knife are bound to look similar eg. throat cutting, stabbing, slashes and gashes. This makes it easy to find both similarities and differences in killings by a knife. It is why Tabram, and Stride, and recently Mary Kelly (very hotly on these very boards) can be included or excluded from the canon depending on which factors one uses when analyzing the crime scenes.
If you haven't looked at it, here's a thread that may interest you:
http://forum.casebook.org/cgi-bin/show.cgi?3/816
Cheers |
Author: Brenda L. Conklin
Sunday, 01 December 2002 - 06:34 pm | | Thanks Jack T. -
I didn't realize the Whitehall body was quite that old. You are correct that a triple event would have really been a "coup" for JTR.
I was wondering what your opinion was of JTR's "press image". Do you think he was concerned about what the papers were writing about him? Do you think the escalating violence was more of a way to shock his public than it was indicative of his state of mind? And lastly, do you think JTR wrote any of the letters at all? (Not just Jack T....anyone who would like to answer I am interested in your opinions) |
Author: Jack Traisson
Sunday, 01 December 2002 - 09:57 pm | | Hi Brenda,
That's a lot of questions for one post!
JtR may have enjoyed the coverage or been indifferent. I simply would not want to speculate on something like that. Although, I will speculate on the torso killer in this regard. The fact that the Whitehall torso was wrapped in newspaper suggests a reader. The Echo of August 24, 1888 was used. He may have been following the Tabram inquest.
I do not believe that Jack wrote any of the popular letters - "Dear Boss", "Saucy Jack", "From Hell", or the "Openshaw Letter" etc. There is no way of knowing if he was a writer of letters or not. He may have wrote some of the obscure letters, or some of the thousands that no longer exist. Your guess is as good as mine.
If you wish to revive the letters topic I suggest you move that question to the appropriate thread though.
Cheers |
Author: Brian Schoeneman
Monday, 02 December 2002 - 11:32 am | | Brenda,
I think Jack was probably following the press accounts, as most modern serial killers seem obsessed with their coverage in the media.
However, I don't think the escalating violence was due to anything more than his need to feed his erotic fantasies. As he got used to feeling of "a kill" he needed to do more and more to the body to get the same rush of power that he got with the first ones. It's kind of like a smoker - when you first start, you only need one to get the buzz. Eventually, you're up to five packs a day. 
Getting back to the point of this thread though, I doubt Jack had a hand in the torso killings. The MO is drastically different. If Jack got off on kidnapping, torturing and then cutting his victims up, he'd have done that, instead of the slash and mutilate kills he did. One demonstrates a lot of planning and organization, the other demonstrates impulse and disorganization.
I think the reason for cutting the victims up was ease of disposal, not obscuring the identity. Hiding the indentity back then was easy - no IDs, no fingerprints, no DNA. All you had were missing person reports and eyewitness IDs.
Anyway, there's my farthings worth.
B |
|
|
|
|
